8 ms·

So this is how the open web dies. Can we fork the W3C into a non-corporate puppet now?

by donatj 9y ago

JoshTriplett 9y ago
We should simply start doing new standards through other organizations. There's no fundamental reason to float new standards through W3C rather than some other organization.
- Touche 9y ago
  I'm completely confused why the W3C is relevant at all. This already did happen, the browsers created the WHATWG. Since the browser vendors' opinions are the only ones that matter, why do we care what W3C thinks?
  - euvitudo 9y ago
    Maybe W3C is trying to stay relevant?
  - tannhaeuser 9y ago
    I disagree that browser vendors are the only ones to matter. The web is used for many things, like legal documents between private parties, by the government(s), for education, personal notes, literature/cultural heritage, the entire way we consume and perceive written information in this age. Do you want to leave all that to an ad company? Because that's what you're effectively doing when you give WHATWG this role. You are of course right that browser developers/vendors get to decide what they're implementing. But web authors, OTOH, can decide which format their works are published in. Browser vendors and WHATWG have shown no interest in simplifying the web. Rather, they're piling up monstrosities of unnecessary complexity, with the effect that, willingly or not, it is becoming infeasible to develop a new browser from scratch. Most of all, WHATWG seem uncapable to come up with any privacy protection mechanism; instead, we're getting DRM. Honi soit qui mal y pense
Analemma_ 9y ago
DRM was coming to browsers with or without the W3C’s blessing. In fact, it was already there via plugins and wasn’t going away. This has changed nothing except where the implementation is documented. The hysteria over this is just ridiculous.
- wyager 9y ago
  Just because some horrible thing currently happens to exist doesn't mean you need to (explicitly or implicitly) endorse it. We should make implementing DRM as expensive and inconvenient as possible.
  - nobodyorother 9y ago
    Totally! We're going to have to start by making sure we never standardize it. </sarcasm>
    - wyager 9y ago
      Yes, absolutely. What's confusing about that? If the DRM benefactors have to keep developing shitty, expensive, unsupported plugins that need to use unofficial APIs and therefore be updated all the time, it's going to cost a lot more to use DRM.
  - _dev_pts_0 9y ago
    Although I share your enthusiasm, I don't think closing the barn door after the horse left is going to help. Customers have to organize and demand an end to DRM by force of withholding money, clicks and eyeballs ... "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." - Frederick Douglass
    - wyager 9y ago
      I'm not sure what your analogy is supposed to express, but this isn't some ideological stand; it's a simple matter of increasing maintenance costs for DRM software.
- 9y ago
tannhaeuser 9y ago
I think that W3C is what makes us believe we're sitting at the table when it comes to decide where the web is heading, when in reality we're not. So while I think W3C has good intentions and is acting in good faith (I'm somewhat undecided on DRM, please convince me of your opinion), I hope for a push to bring the lack of stewardship of the web to public attention, and another standards body (ISO/IEC, IETF, whatever), or W3C under a new statue to emerge and take the role of W3C-as-it-is. (Re-posting this from the other thread [1] which didn't make it) [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15277622 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15277622
- saimiam 9y ago
  > convince me In case you haven't read this excellent piece against DRM - https://archive.org/details/InformationDoesntWantToBeFree https://archive.org/details/InformationDoesntWantToBeFree
yahna 9y ago
Will it matter? Any organization created to manage web standards is going to be dependent on browser vendors. Google/Microsoft/Apple want DRM so we get DRM.
- dmoy 9y ago
  I would posit that RIAA/MPAA/etc want DRM, and won't consent to Google/Microsoft/Apple opening up access to content without it, so we get DRM.
appleflaxen 9y ago
sure, if you want to become the wwgnu foundation. nobody cares about things they perceive as fringe ideological issues until it's too late. they'll marginalize you by making fun of your personal habits while the open web dies. only those of us who knew the web before it was closed will really know/care why it was special.

So this is how the open web dies. Can we fork the W3C into a non-corporate puppet now?

by donatj 9y ago

So this is how the open web dies. Can we fork the W3C into a non-corporate puppet now?

We should simply start doing new standards through other organizations. There's no fundamental reason to float new standards through W3C rather than some other organization.

Touche 9y ago
I'm completely confused why the W3C is relevant at all. This already did happen, the browsers created the WHATWG. Since the browser vendors' opinions are the only ones that matter, why do we care what W3C thinks?
- euvitudo 9y ago
  Maybe W3C is trying to stay relevant?
- tannhaeuser 9y ago
  I disagree that browser vendors are the only ones to matter. The web is used for many things, like legal documents between private parties, by the government(s), for education, personal notes, literature/cultural heritage, the entire way we consume and perceive written information in this age. Do you want to leave all that to an ad company? Because that's what you're effectively doing when you give WHATWG this role. You are of course right that browser developers/vendors get to decide what they're implementing. But web authors, OTOH, can decide which format their works are published in. Browser vendors and WHATWG have shown no interest in simplifying the web. Rather, they're piling up monstrosities of unnecessary complexity, with the effect that, willingly or not, it is becoming infeasible to develop a new browser from scratch. Most of all, WHATWG seem uncapable to come up with any privacy protection mechanism; instead, we're getting DRM. Honi soit qui mal y pense

Analemma_ 9y ago

DRM was coming to browsers with or without the W3C’s blessing. In fact, it was already there via plugins and wasn’t going away. This has changed nothing except where the implementation is documented. The hysteria over this is just ridiculous.

wyager 9y ago
Just because some horrible thing currently happens to exist doesn't mean you need to (explicitly or implicitly) endorse it. We should make implementing DRM as expensive and inconvenient as possible.
- nobodyorother 9y ago
  Totally! We're going to have to start by making sure we never standardize it. </sarcasm>
  - wyager 9y ago
    Yes, absolutely. What's confusing about that? If the DRM benefactors have to keep developing shitty, expensive, unsupported plugins that need to use unofficial APIs and therefore be updated all the time, it's going to cost a lot more to use DRM.
- _dev_pts_0 9y ago
  Although I share your enthusiasm, I don't think closing the barn door after the horse left is going to help. Customers have to organize and demand an end to DRM by force of withholding money, clicks and eyeballs ... "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." - Frederick Douglass
  - wyager 9y ago
    I'm not sure what your analogy is supposed to express, but this isn't some ideological stand; it's a simple matter of increasing maintenance costs for DRM software.
9y ago

tannhaeuser 9y ago

I think that W3C is what makes us believe we're sitting at the table when it comes to decide where the web is heading, when in reality we're not. So while I think W3C has good intentions and is acting in good faith (I'm somewhat undecided on DRM, please convince me of your opinion), I hope for a push to bring the lack of stewardship of the web to public attention, and another standards body (ISO/IEC, IETF, whatever), or W3C under a new statue to emerge and take the role of W3C-as-it-is. (Re-posting this from the other thread [1] which didn't make it) [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15277622 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15277622

saimiam 9y ago
> convince me In case you haven't read this excellent piece against DRM - https://archive.org/details/InformationDoesntWantToBeFree https://archive.org/details/InformationDoesntWantToBeFree

yahna 9y ago

Will it matter? Any organization created to manage web standards is going to be dependent on browser vendors. Google/Microsoft/Apple want DRM so we get DRM.

dmoy 9y ago
I would posit that RIAA/MPAA/etc want DRM, and won't consent to Google/Microsoft/Apple opening up access to content without it, so we get DRM.

appleflaxen 9y ago

sure, if you want to become the wwgnu foundation. nobody cares about things they perceive as fringe ideological issues until it's too late. they'll marginalize you by making fun of your personal habits while the open web dies. only those of us who knew the web before it was closed will really know/care why it was special.